My Problem with the Occupy Movement

I read the forums on http://occupywallst.org. A lot of what I see there is anger towards a faceless 1% simply characterized by "corporate greed". I do see people saying things that are intelligent, well-thought out, and constructive, but I do see quite a bit of people latching onto a catch phrase and repeating it ad nauseum. I'm not saying they don't understand what they're doing, but I think that it's not helping the movement very much. This is the biggest argument against the Occupy movement that I've seen: people aren't being concrete in their arguments, in stating their goals, and generally have no plan. So I thought about what I would do if my voice were to be heard.

I think the first thing is that I would list the major issues being addressed in real and concrete terms without resorting to fallacious tactics. No buzz words (like "corporate greed"), no creating an unjustified conflict (The 99% vs the 1%), no inflammatory language. Yes, those things excite people and get them to join, but it removes from the credibility of the movement (note: the Tea Party resorts to the same tactics). Why not look at the actual issues?

• Tax breaks for corporations
• Outsourcing jobs with no consequences
• Campaign donations from major corporations
• Funding war on credit
• Abuse of public welfare systems
• Too-low tariffs on imported goods
• People supporting companies that outsource
• People supporting large banks
• People using cheaper-made imported goods

These are just a few of the issues, but in my mind, they are the most concrete. And readers, do you notice that I turned some of this back around on people? We have a responsibility. We are part of what allows this, you know. We vote for our leaders, we buy the cheapest material without thinking of the consequences, we bank with Chase and Citibank and their kind. The government may be part of the problem, the corporations looking at their bottom line may be part of the problem, but WE are part of the problem, too. We cannot deny our own responsibilities.

None of us are entitled to having our demands met without sacrifice. Yes, most of us work hard for our incomes and still struggle. Many of us are victims of circumstance (for example, my husband and I were both laid off, his from his company closing, and mine from outsourced jobs). This doesn't mean that we stop working and ask for our debts to be canceled, because our decisions are part of why we have these debts, and the other part is the events out of our control and how we react to them.

What can the Occupy movement do to encourage individual responsibilities? Leaving the big banks was a good idea (even if Citigroup did call for arrests of these people). This needs to keep happening. Lists of companies that outsource the majority of their labor should be made so that people know who to boycott (by their own choice). If financially possible, people should refinance their homes with smaller local banks to keep money in their local economies. Sitting in a park shouting catch phrases may bring the initial attention, but that attention should be further directed and channeled into means of promoting real action.

I still support the Occupy movement. There's so much potential if only they would live up to it! It's getting people together, getting them talking, and getting attention, but none of this will do any good without directing it towards concrete goals.

Numbers May Lie

How many of these "I'm not one of the 99%" signs have you seen? They say similar things: I work hard, I have a small house, I pay my credit cards, I'm not complaining. I've seen plenty of them. The problem is that these are people who, for the most part, miss the entire point of the Occupy movement. Even the ones who do seem to understand the issue don't sympathize with those who are trying to change things because, as they see it, this is our bed and we better lay in it. (I pray I'm making an accurate generalization, because this has been the attitudes I have most been exposed to.)

That being said, I think there are people flocking to the cause out of "Sheepism", meaning that it looks like the cool thing to do, they hear things they generally agree with, and are looking for an outlet. I know that's not the entire case, but that's also something I've been exposed to within the movement. These people are also missing the point.

How did the 99% thing start? Well, it came from this chart (borrowed from SodaHead):

As you can see, the chart shows that the rich are getting richer and the not-rich are staying about the same. I can pull up any number of other resources from the US Government that outlines this, but as far as I can see, this simple chart is the catalyst that started the reaction from a composition of unemployment, a depressed market, and a government that allows businesses to outsource our jobs and puts our wars on a Visa Card (aka credit).

Now all of you who say you're not in the 99% should be more accurate. The statistics say that like it or not, if your income isn't over $750,000, you're in that 99% category. You may not support the movement, but you are still included in that statistic. Your claim is inaccurate. When the Occupy movement speaks, they're including you even if you don't include yourself.

How about numbers? Numbers do lie, they can be manipulated. There are some who claim a different percentile, others who say they are happy with their lot. And who knows, maybe the Occupy movement is manipulating the numbers. Maybe the government is, too. We all do what we want to make our causes seem correct. We hide smugly behind our "proof" and use it to disprove someone else. We're all trying to be a little superior, aren't we?

Not really so, I think. The way I see it, everyone's tried to get a leg up on the other. Good intentions led to corruption and mismanagement. I'd love to have the giant cosmic reset button on our government or summon the spirits of the Founding Fathers so they could say, "Damn you, kids, that's not what we meant!" I wish we could fix the salaries of politicians so they can be in government because they love our country, not because the pay is good. I wish we could break the bond of friendship and need between our government and business and make it how it should be: the governing and the governed.

There's nothing wrong with being rich. There's nothing wrong with having a mortgage and working hard for dinner. Complacency is wrong. Greed is wrong. Sending our jobs overseas is wrong. Letting people starve on the streets is wrong. Police hurting people trying to exercise their First Amendment right is wrong. Being "right" without listening to each other is VERY WRONG.

Put the numbers aside and start paying attention to what people are saying.

Bank Account Closures

Why are citizens being arrested for mass closures of personal bank accounts? Is it even legal? Well, according to this article on the Wall Street Journal website, customers coming in to close their accounts were asked to leave and were later accused of trespassing. Really?

It's obvious that the activity in response to the call on OccupyWallSt.org to close bank accounts with the major banks. It's a very simple suggestion: close your major bank account and open one with a credit union. I've also heard it suggested that people use local banks as well. Personally, I'm for this, especially those who participate in outsourcing jobs and accepting government bailouts and tax breaks.

The banks clearly see this as a threat if they're taking such a strong stance and going this far. Of course, finding out that the banks are requesting police support isn't doing much to endear me to their plight. I would hope the average consumer would sit up and take notice as well. Do you want to support a company that treats its customers like this? Do you want to support a company that's contributing to the decline in America's economic status? Do you want to support a company that has such little respect for the rights of people to chose what business they support?

Personally, I think hitting the banks first is the best approach, as long as we're careful with how we do it. Going in and closing accounts should be safe and clear-cut. It's far easier and possibly easier than massive boycotts. Financing a loan for a home with a local credit union rather than some bank that's contributed to job loss, faulty lending policies (resulting in mass foreclosures), and using its money to control government policies is, in my opinion, better for local economies and will send a message to those companies that there is an alternative and we don't want to support them anymore.

The 99%? (Reposted from my Tumblr)

I keep looking at these OccupyWallStreet posts, and then I see the anti-99% posts, too. I keep wondering why I’m so fascinated by them both. Surely I see both sides of the issue, don’t I? I can understand why people are so very frustrated with corporate America. I can understand why people who work hard while others get every little thing they want are frustrated. Conversely, I can see why people who work hard and have no problem with it are mad at the people who are mad.

I grew up very lower middle class. We weren’t exactly poverty level, but we didn’t have a lot of goodies. I was beaten up by my step-dad, and I’m ok with who it’s made me today. I’m unemployed and have student loan debt, credit cards, etc. And with all of this, I accept that it was a combination of choices within our household as well as outside forces that put us where we are. Corporations buy out other corporations and outsource the work (my case). Bigger corporations force the smaller ones out of business (my hubby’s case). We’re in that 99% whether we want to be or not.

I don’t think the 99% campaign is about people complaining about their own lives, just people presenting examples of how the economy has affected them. That being said, they’re not alone, and we all have to work hard to make our way in the world and take what opportunities come our way. We can’t sit on our asses and expect a handout, because then we become part of the problem. No, people are frustrated, and they have the right to speak out, just as other people have the right to be vocal against them. Hooray Freedom of Speech.

In the end, I support the OccupyWallStreet initiative not because of the 99%, but because of how our government is joined at the hip with corporate America. These companies didn’t need bail outs. If Capitalism was truly to be effective, then these companies should have failed so new ones could rise in their place. I think the Government should stop funding wars on their Visa and raise some taxes, just as it was done during the World Wars. I think the Government should crack down on job outsourcing and keep the jobs at home. I think Import Tariffs need to return. I see OccupyWallStreet as an opportunity to get people in elected offices to notice the plight of those they’re meant to represent. Even if half of the initiative is misguided, I think it will still get the dialogue going.

We are, in the end, all responsible for our own lives. We have to work with what we have. We all have to suck it up and do without and try to find work and go to school and give ourselves and our families the best life we can offer. That being said, we do have to admit that the decisions of those we voted into power have also put us in our situations, and if we want things to change, it’s also our responsibility to bring it to their attention. Perhaps in addition to occupying Wall Street, we occupy the Capitol, too.

That being said, I am one of the 99%, even if I don’t want to be.